Robbie Graham’s collection of essays, UFOs: Reframing the Debate, is a mixed affair, with some entries being of greater interest than others.

The collection begins with a kind of back-and-forth approach between experiencers/true believers and skeptics, prefacing entries by more nuanced theorists, who look at the UFO phenomena from perspectives that are refreshingly different from the mainstream Extraterrestrial Hypothesis (ETH)/abduction/”nuts and bolts” approaches.

Among the essays that merit close attention are Curt Collins’s thoroughly readable and engaging minute-by-minute recounting of the “Roswell slides” debacle, and the always elegant theoretical approaches of Greg Bishop, who here argues that human consciousness and perception inevitably influences both the experience and any subsequent attempts at making sense of UFO encounters, provocatively describing them as a sort of psychotropic “art project.” Red Pill Junkie’s engaging celebration of the ongoing impenetrability of the phenomenon is both thought-provoking and entertaining. Lorin Cutts proposes a “mythological zone” that exists between unexplained phenomena and its experience, while Micah Hanks helpfully unpacks the ideological underpinnings of modern-day UFO skepticism. Joshua Cutchin suggests that we move beyond materialism in our attempts to come to grips with what remains an altogether inscrutable phenomenon, and Robert Brandstetter’s decidedly philosophical essay theorizes that the UFO essentially acts as a mirror for human experience.

Regrettably, editor Graham’s inclusivity makes this collection a bit unfocused and perhaps unintentionally waters down its impact. Given that there is no shortage of writings by either devotees or skeptics, of which at least one third of the essays here are curious examples, this volume would have perhaps benefited from less inclusiveness and a tighter editorial focus. Yet, even with these faults, Graham’s volume remains a useful compendium for the more novice reader, providing them with both interesting repetitions of, and welcome alternatives to, the dominant – and unquestionably stale – ETH-based mythology that continues to paralyze and impede progress within the field of ufology.

]]>http://www.openminds.tv/review-ufos-reframing-the-debate/40692/feed1Hypercivilisations and the primitive extraterrestrial hypothesishttp://www.openminds.tv/hypercivilisations-and-the-primitive-extraterrestrial-hypothesis/40633
http://www.openminds.tv/hypercivilisations-and-the-primitive-extraterrestrial-hypothesis/40633#commentsWed, 19 Jul 2017 20:41:25 +0000http://www.openminds.tv/?p=40633More and more specialists admit that life is everywhere in Universe and three-four billion years of favourable conditions, lasting on a planet, ensures the emergence and development of intelligent beings and eventually the birth of a “technological civilization”, capable of building spaceships, for travelling to other inhabitable planets. These conditions, though rare, are found in many places in the immensity of the universe. On this basis, the extraterrestrial hypothesis became the easiest way to explain the UFO phenomenon.

On the other hand, prestigious ufologists, including Dr J. Allen Hynek or Jacques Vallée, questioned this explanation. They, along with die-hard sceptics, have mentioned, among others, that the distances between civilizations are too large for such cosmic travelling. But, as I have argued in my recent book “UFOs over Romania”, if we make an appropriate approach, we will discover that the most important distances between cosmic civilisations are not those in space but those in time.

I have estimated that in the history of our Galaxy could have come into being a number of technological civilisations, of which, maybe a few hundred survived the childhood diseases (that we face now on Earth) and still exist. But these civilisations have not arisen simultaneously. For example, in July 2015 it was announced the discovery at 1,400 light years from Earth, of the exoplanet Kepler 452b. It is similar to Earth, orbiting in the habitable zone of a Sun-like star. That solar system is one billion years older than ours. That means that life and a possible technological civilisation could have appeared here one billion years earlier than on Earth. More generally, the first technological civilisations in the Milky Way could appear a billion years ago, or even earlier. Consequently, we understand that the possible civilisations in the Cosmos are far apart from each other not only in space, but also in time. In our Galaxy, these several hundred surviving civilisations, estimated above, have appeared, most likely, one in a several million years. Therefore, in the Milky Way there is no civilisation close to our level.

What will become of our civilisation (if it will survive) over millions (or billions) of years? It is impossible to imagine. We do not forget that we are not able to predict our future, even in a perspective of just several hundred years. How would the inhabitants of a civilisation that has outstripped us with millions of years look like? Maybe they became immortal, maybe time and space do not matter to them, they may have moved into a pervasive virtual reality, in other dimensions and so on. But the real answer is almost certainly even much more complex and defies our logic and imagination. We can accept however that they have been transformed into something else, beyond our understanding; into something we can name as a “hypercivilization”.

If somebody considers that we were too optimistic and the intelligent beings are much scarcer, we should add that our Milky Way is only one of at least 150 billion, more or less similar, galaxies of the Universe accessible to our instruments. And we have strong reasons to believe that there are other Universes too, maybe “parallel” ones, maybe from other states of matter, or parts of a “Multiverse” etc.

Schooling and science fiction, but not only, set our minds on patterns ignoring completely the possibility of hypercivilisations. Consequently, we face two “extraterrestrial hypotheses”: the first is what we might call the “primitive extraterrestrial hypothesis”, the other that of hypercivilisations.

The “Primitive Extraterrestrial Hypothesis” assumes that all cosmic civilisations are more or less at the same level of evolution. Therefore it nurtures some false preconceptions as: very long and difficult cosmic voyages, wish to land on the lawn of White House, equal rights, conversation, invasion, intervention, aid and so on.

This primitive view is completely implausible. If hypercivilisations exist (and they exist, with a probability of 99.999999%) they exploited, in the smallest detail, our Galaxy, millions of years ago, so they have known, for a long time, about our existence. This reasoning led Enrico Fermi, when he said, in 1950: “they should be here; where are they?” But neither he, nor many others, did consider that representatives of hypercivilisations could be here, among us, but could look so different from our expectations that we cannot recognise them. What prevents us to see them is, also, a set of widespread and deeply rooted prejudices, such as those below.

The preconception of equal rights. A difference of millions of years, or even hundreds of millions, is as huge as between us and a lizard or even an ant. If they are here (as it is highly probable), they can examine us, monitor our evolution, even contact us in some form, but they will never put them at the same level with us.

The preconception of conversation. As far back as 1959, Giuseppe Cocconi and Philip Morrison argued that if the difference between two civilisations is of millions of years, the probability that they could exchange ideas is zero. We interact sometimes with a lizard; but this will never be a conversation, they said.

The temporal provincialism (term used by Dr J. Allen Hynek). It states that, in opposition with the previous dark centuries, the last three-four hundred years brought us finally to the light of real truth and science. In this light, now we can decide what facts can be accepted and what will never be possible. If one hundred years ago or so we started to use the radio, some believe it will last as the best means of communications forever. If one hundred years ago Einstein postulated that the speed of light is a limit, no other physical law will be discovered until the end of times to avoid this limit and so on. As a peculiar example, we have the SETI preconception. According to it, even if the radio signals need thousands of years from one inhabited world to other, the cosmic civilisations will consider that signalling by radio waves will be, forever, the most appropriate means of contact and that we should spend money to search for them.

The preconception of invasion. For many people it should be normal if a cosmic civilisation arrives on Earth, it will attempt to conquer us by force. But the hypercivilisations probably knew, millions of years ago, that we are here; therefore they could invade us at any time and, in a certain sense, probably we are already invaded by them, for millions of years. Some “out-of-place artifacts” could be a hint of that.

The preconception of intervention and of aid. Some hope that the ET will help us (or at least some “chosen”) to overcome future catastrophes. But even us, if we discover a valuable piece of land, which has escaped from the human intrusion, we try to declare it a reservation, permitting only a very limited intervention, for scientific reasons. This attitude seems to be strengthening in time. A hypercivilisation observing the Earth and the human technological civilisation should act in a similar manner, avoiding to interfere in our evolution, but taking samples, making some experiments, having very limited contacts (not at all officially or as between equals) with only some individuals, selected upon their and not our criteria.

Therefore no settlement, no destruction, on one hand and no official contact, conversation or substantial help, on the other hand, are to be expected from highly advanced cosmic civilisations, even if they are here now.

The difference between a hypercivilisation and us could be as high as that between us and ants. Some entomologists who would propose to study the life of an anthill will try to disturb, as little as possible, its life. They could of course make experiments, examining or modifying some ants, or even taking them in remote laboratories, trying to create new “races” and so on. They will certainly try to find out, as much as possible, about the life of the anthill, but will not “present credentials” to the queen of the ants. If the entomologists have the technology, they will create some robot ants, sending them in to the hill and watching from a safe place, for example “on the computer screen”, the data transmitted by them. And if a robot ant would be lost in that mission, the incident would add a bit to the costs of research, without being a tragedy.

We can speculate that a hypercivilisation could attempt to realise, using genetic materials from the Earth, new races, with greater brain, with higher intelligence, adapted for some special tasks, etc. Therefore, many “races” described by the alleged abductees (the greys, the tall blonds etc.) can be such artificial human races or even bio-robots derived from the human species. They can be “produced” for example in reservations or bases somewhere outside the Earth. In the same manner we make new varieties of wheat from the traditional ones. Sometimes, the perfect variety of wheat became sterile or exposed to new diseases. At that moment the agronomists will try to find some appropriate genes in the pool represented by the primitive species of wheat, to improve the “perfect” variety. What if humans on Earth are the “wild pool” of genes, suitable to improve some artificial races elsewhere? In this case it will be no problem of compatibility between the visitors and us, as in some of the reported UFO abduction and hybridisation stories, but also, for example, in the biblical note: “In those days, divine beings and human daughters had sexual relations and gave birth to children. These were the ancient heroes” (Genesis, 6, 4). Some people suppose even that there is an ongoing external intervention in the evolution of the human race in order to improve it.

But obviously the comparison above – of mankind with an anthill – is slightly forced, as mankind is, nevertheless, a potential future hypercivilisation. The arising of a technological civilisation could be a very rare event in our Galaxy, occurring probably once in several millions of years. So it is normal for us to be of interest to the higher intelligences. But what could they expect from us?

A hypercivilisation will behave elusively and will not give us its knowledge and technologies; even more, it will forbid that. This is not, only, because of human aggressiveness and xenophobia, making from all new technology new weapons, nor only to avoid a “cultural shock”, which could virtually destroy all our social, economical, political, military, scientific, religious and cultural structures. I can speculate they have also some other reasons for that. Hypercivilisations could wait (and maybe harvest even now) our original ideas, viewpoints, creations (in art, science, philosophy, ethics etc.), produced as a result of millions of years of our independent evolution. And all that expected crop could be destroyed by a premature contact.

Some old, apparently absurd, stories may be an indication of such an attitude: the punishment for the apple of the forbidden tree of knowledge, the chaining of Prometheus, or the fallen angels (from Book of Enoch), thrown into a pit full of fire, because they were taught earthlings some skills.

Many abductees or contactees spoke about ethereal light balls as “deposits of knowledge and intelligence”, recording “everything in the Universe”, among others, the life of all (or of the most interesting) individuals. We have some hints for this when we speak about: the “Book of Life”, “Akashic Records”, “collective unconscious”, or even “morphogenetic field” etc. That “super-memory” could be written on a “spiritual” support, or on something around us we are not yet able to imagine. Sometimes, some people, under certain conditions, could gain access to this data warehouse. In that way we can explain: channelling, “xenoglossia”, “walk-ins”, “reincarnation”, ghosts, etc. In such a virtual reality, time is different. We can travel in the past, live events, without changing the real past, or we can see scenarios of the future (sometimes apocalyptical), without accepting fatality.

Of course, all the above is not a proof that the hypercivilisations are the explanation for everything strange and particularly for UFOs. It is only one hypothesis; but – I think – one which cannot be easily discarded.

]]>http://www.openminds.tv/hypercivilisations-and-the-primitive-extraterrestrial-hypothesis/40633/feed2Ufology Today: Professionalism and Respecthttp://www.openminds.tv/ufology-today-professionalism-and-respect/37650
http://www.openminds.tv/ufology-today-professionalism-and-respect/37650#commentsTue, 14 Jun 2016 22:18:36 +0000http://www.openminds.tv/?p=37650Having spent most of my lifetime as a ufologist, I have had the pleasure of working with so many incredible ufologists over five decades. My admiration of these people who have dedicated an extraordinary amount of personal time, finances, and more towards the UFO subject is endless. Even more, there are many people who do the hard work and go unrecognized. To them and others, I extend a big thank you.

Ufology is a very rewarding venture. Not only can it propel you in many directions that you would not have previously decided to venture into, but these ventures are life altering and create a new reality that you personally adopt about the world around you. As we all know, there are many ufologists who do not share the same beliefs and notions about the UFOs and the occupants that many claim to have seen or experienced personally. To some, a UFO or related event may have brought you into this field of study in the first place while some of us, have never seen a UFO, either believe or do not believe or are highly skeptical of the claims around this subject.

For me personally, I am saddened by recently ever increasing trends on social media to see interested parties splinter into groups that are like-minded and help perpetuate divisions within ufology. I also continue to see more aggressive behaviors such as bullying come into play. It seems that the current anger being mentioned in the Political spectrum is exhibiting itself in our world. I also see a lack of tolerance towards those who express a reality different to our own. While I may not readily believe for example, that contactees are communicating with aliens, I do not see a need to bash or bully them for this. I can express my belief civilly, which may be counter to theirs.

A big trend is to label people. Recently I am seeing more and more the need to declare people “debunkers” just because they express a counter position to yours or present facts that call into question yours. Just because you may have an education or experience with the subject, you are a debunker. I saw an object in 2012 that later turned out to be a secret Google Balloon (aka Project Loon) and identified it to be such after it had crossed multiple states and witnessed and photographed by a few dozen, I was now a “debunker.”

There is a need for a more unified ufology movement. One that recognizes that courteous behavior is important; that diversity of opinions is a good thing; that one’s experience may differ from another and this does not make them a “bad” person or an enemy to our group think we have fostered on our Facebook or other social media forums.

Recently I gave a presentation to an honors college class at the University of Alabama in Tuscaloosa. The professor asked me to help him teach these students critical thinking skills. I was at one point in my career an Assistant Regional Director for the American Society for Training & Development (ASTD). We had completed a study and found that this skill is diminishing at an alarming rate in our younger generations and that should we not address this, problems could arise in the future. Today, it is ever present. We see many who knowingly accept at face value everything that is on the internet, on TV and every news story out there. There is no investigation or inquiry whatsoever. It is all fact. We see the rapid acceptance that the YouTube video showing a mothership over the White House as being yet another event that the government is covering up.

If ufology is every going to solve the many questions that remain unanswered about this phenomena, it has to come together through appropriate behavioral modeling by its leaders, meaning, that discipline is needed along with the things I mentioned above. How many of us see inappropriate behavior on our sites? How many of us divide the people around us into camps? How many of us are skeptical to an excess and turn conversations into a debate that ends up with further divisions and yes, how many of us are hell bent on “it’s either my way, or the highway?”

It is my hope that before I pass, that ufology can become a respectable and professionally-based movement. I believe that more can be achieved and accomplished when people and organizations work together. It’s time to bury hatchets and certainly no time to be building walls. I prefer the bridges and people are the ones to build them and enjoy the walk over them. Thanks for all of your dedication to ufology, regardless of your label, beliefs and reality.

]]>http://www.openminds.tv/ufology-today-professionalism-and-respect/37650/feed11Open letter to the U.S. Air Force regarding allegations of UFO disinformationhttp://www.openminds.tv/open-letter-u-s-air-force-allegations-ufo-disinformation/27071
http://www.openminds.tv/open-letter-u-s-air-force-allegations-ufo-disinformation/27071#commentsTue, 06 May 2014 18:50:41 +0000http://www.openminds.tv/?p=27071I sent this letter to the U.S. Air Force on July 11, 2013 to solicit an official response to allegations by ex-special agent Richard Doty of the U.S. Air Force Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI) that he participated in spreading UFO disinformation. Among his claims, he says he broke into a civilian’s home, created hoaxed documents, and lied to two U.S. Senators. Some of these are criminal acts that he claims he committed on orders from his superiors in the AFOSI. Whether or not this is true, these acts were committed while he was an AFOSI special agent, and I believe the U.S. Air Force needs to respond.

After working with the AFOSI public affairs department on Freedom of Information Act Requests (FOIA) related to this incident, I was told I would be able to speak to someone who could give me an official response. However, once I received the documents I was told they had nothing further to say.

—–

Allegations of Criminal Misconduct

Air Force Office of Special Investigations Agent Richard Doty claims to have partaken in the acts of misinforming members of congress, breaking into the private residence of a civilian government contractor, and disseminating known forgeries of government documents while on active duty in the 1980s. Furthermore, he claims to have committed these acts on the orders of his superiors at AFOSI.

Although his claims have garnered a large amount of public attention, including having been the subject of several books (including one by New York Times Journalist Howard Blum), and were directly related to the government contractor mentioned above having been temporarily committed to a mental health facility, the U.S. Air Force has yet to comment on the veracity of his claims.

Was the U.S. Air Force involved with these criminal acts, as claimed by Doty, and if not what was done regarding his conduct?

Background

Beginning in the 1980s, Paul Bennewitz began reporting strange lights over the Manzano area of Kirtland Air Force Base, and claimed to have recorded unusual signals emanating from the base (1). Bennewitz was the owner of Thunder Scientific, a humidity company with contracts with Kirtland and several other branches of the military and government contractors (2). He believed the lights and signals were due to extraterrestrial activity (3).

According to documents retrieved from previous FOIA requests, officers at Kirtland looked at his evidence on two occasions and decided not to investigate (1)(3). Bennewitz contacted Senator Harrison Schmitt and Senator Pete Domenici, both of whom made inquiries about the status of the investigation on Bennewitz’s material to Air Force Office of Special Investigations Special Agent Richard Doty. In both cases, Agent Doty informed the senators that there was no AFOSI investigation on this matter (3)(4). Likewise, the files do show that after each review of Bennewitz’s material, it was recommended that an investigation not be initiated (1)(3). This is the extent of the material regarding Bennewitz and AFOSI in these files.

However, Richard Doty has since claimed that he lied to the senators on behalf of AFOSI, and that there was a disinformation campaign underway against Bennewitz. According to statements he has made to several associates, and on at least one national radio program, he told Bennewitz there was an investigation and he gave Bennewitz hoaxed material to support this claim (5). The first such document was given to Bennewtiz after Senator Schmitt’s inquiry, and just prior to Senator Domenici’s (3)(4)(14).

According to Doty, and witnessed by others, he continued his campaign to convince Bennewitz that he was actually experiencing extraterrestrial phenomena for several years. New Mexico state police officer Gabe Valdez claimed in interviews with me that he was present when Doty flew Bennewitz over the town of Dulce, New Mexico (6). Doty claims he convinced Bennewitz that there was an alien base under nearby Archuleta Mountain.

It was during this time that Doty claims he was ordered to break into Bennewitz’s residence. He told this to the author of a book on his disinformation activities titled, Project Beta: The Story of Paul Bennewitz, National Security, and the Creation of a Modern UFO Myth (7), and to retired U.S. Army Colonel John Alexander (8). Eventually, Bennewitz became so paranoid regarding an extraterrestrial invasion that he had to spend time in a mental institution (5).

Doty continues to spread information on UFOs and aliens he alleges to have received while working for AFOSI (5). Many of the documents he disseminated during his campaign against Bennewitz have grown into huge modern mythologies, spawning books, movies and TV shows.

Although on two occasions the Air Force has stated that documents pertaining to this matter, allegedly dispensed by Doty, are not real (9)(10), they have not spoken to whether Doty was under orders, as he claims, when he lied to the senators, broke into Bennewitz’s home, and dispensed material to Bennewitz making him believe he was under investigation. The question then is not whether the documents are hoaxes, but whether Doty hoaxed these documents under his own volition, or was ordered to do so as a part of a disinformation campaign, as he claims is the case.

If Doty was not acting under orders, this would mean he was forging government documents while he was an active AFOSI agent. In that case, AFOSI needs to respond to whether they were aware of Doty’s activities, and if so, what action was taken. It would be surprising to find AFOSI was not aware of this sort of criminal activity going on for several years by one of their agents. Doty has indicated he was demoted at one point, however, this is not documented in the military records I obtained through FOIA, nor is the reason for this demotion (11). It is also unknown whether this demotion has any relation to the apparent criminal activity related to this case.

The official AFOSI Bennewitz files

These files have been obtained separately through FOIA requests by UFO researcher and author William Moore, Citizens Against UFO Secrecy (CAUS), and Navy physicist, Bruce Maccabee. Because of the multiple sources, and the high credibility of Dr. Maccabee and the files released by CAUS, I believe these documents to be legitimate. The USAF has informed the recipients that these are all of the files related to AFOSI and Bennewitz. I am seeking confirmation through my own pending FOIA request (Case # 2013-03291-F). [This was written prior to the fulfillment of my FOIA request, which was fulfilled August 2, 2013, and included the same documents I reference here. View the documents I received here.]

The first document is a Multipurpose Internal OSI Form dated October 28, 1980, and signed by Major Thomas Cseh. The subject is “Alleged Sightings of Unidentified Aerial Lights in Restricted Test Range.” It states that Bennewitz contacted Doty through Major Ernest E. Edwards. Bennewitz claimed to have “knowledge and evidence of threats against Manzano Weapons Storage area.” On October 26, 1980 Doty, along with Jerry Miller, Chief Scientific Advisor for the Air Force Test and Evaluation Center at Kirtland, went to Bennewitz’s residence and conducted an interview. It is noted that Miller had experience investigating UFOs with Project Blue Book. They reviewed photographs, 8mm film, and recording tapes showing periods of high levels of electrical magnetism emitted from the Manzano/Coyote Canyon area. They noted Bennewitz also had surveillance equipment pointed at the base to record high frequencies (1).

They concluded that there were some type of “unidentified aerial objects” caught on the film, but they could not determine whether they posed a threat. They also found the electronic recording tapes to be inconclusive. They informed FTD [Foreign Technology Division] of their findings who wanted to inspect Bennewitz’s data, and briefed their command. However, it was noted that command “did not request an investigation at this time (1).”

The second file is another Multipurpose Internal OSI Form dated November 26, 1980, and also signed by Major Thomas Cseh. The subject is again, “Alleged Sightings of Unidentified Aerial Lights in Restricted Test Range.” The report describes a meeting that took place on the base on November 10, 1980, between Brigadier General William Brooksher, seven other officers, and Bennewitz. Bennewitz presented film and photographs which he believed to be of alien spacecraft, and described how he believed he was in contact with these aliens. He requested a grant to further research his interactions. One of those present, Dr. Lehman, Director of the Air Force Weapons Laboratory at Kirtland, told Bennewitz he would help him fill out paperwork to request a grant from the USAF (3).

This document then states that on November 17, Doty advised Bennewitz that AFOSI would not investigate the objects, and that they were “not in a position to evaluate the information and photographs.” It also says that on the date of the report, November 26, 1980, Doty received a phone call from Senator Harrison Schmitt inquiring about AFOSI’s role in the investigation of the sightings reported by Bennewitz. Doty advised Schmitt that AFOSI was not investigating the phenomenon and referred him to another AFOSI district. Schmitt declined and said he would check with the Secretary of the Air Force to determine the correct USAF agency to investigate the phenomena. The final note in this document is that Bennewitz had many conversations with Senator Schmitt, and Schmitt had in turn called Brigadier General Brooksher on multiple occasions regarding Bennewitz’s sightings (3).

The third document is an AFOSI communication form noting a meeting between Senator Peter Domenici and Doty regarding Bennewitz. It is signed by Colonel Frank Huey. It says that the IG [Inspector General] contacted AFOSI to advise them that Senator Domenici wanted to talk to Doty. Colonel Harvell approved the meeting, and Domenici, who was already in the IG’s office, went directly to speak to Doty. The report then says a subsequent check was made with Domenici’s aide, Mr. Tijeros, to find out what they wanted to discuss with Doty. Tijeros said they wanted to know whether AFOSI had conducted a formal investigation of Bennewitz. Tijeros was informed that there was no formal investigation. Tijeros indicated that Senator Domenici will likely make no further inquiries into the matter (4).

These three documents seem to indicate that AFOSI humored Bennewitz by examining his evidence, but did not engage in a formal investigation. Doty served as the point of contact to inform Senators Schmitt and Domenici, as well as Bennewitz, that AFOSI would not be investigating Bennewitz’s alleged alien evidence.

Richard Doty’s claims

The source for the claims I am referring to is a radio show appearance by Richard Doty on February 27, 2005. It was on a night time program called Coast to Coast AM, with a very large international listening audience. Although Doty has done many other interviews, they are almost all in print or online. Often his claims vary from one interview to another, and when pressed on this point, Doty often denies he made the statements. This includes a book he is credited as co-writing titled, Exempt from Disclosure. He claims he did not write the chapter credited to him, although his co-author notes he did sign the paperwork to authorize the book and cashed the checks for payment. Either way, I use the radio interview because it is similar to the core story he has been portraying in other interviews, and is one of the few sources with his verifiable direct statements.

According to Doty, in reference to his visit to Bennewitz’s residence with Miller on October 26, 1980, he says “The report was that this person had sufficient knowledge and the right equipment to tap into sensitive communications equipment and sensitive projects that was (sic) occurring in Kirtland.” The radio host, Art Bell responded, “Alright, somewhere in the mix of all this comes disinformation. In other words, you are going to admit tonight, I believe, that you dispensed disinformation, is that true?” To that Doty responds: “That is absolutely true.” Doty explained that this was done to protect base secrets. He said, “what we did is that we convinced him that what he was picking up wasn’t anything classified from the base, but in fact it was probably of alien origin (5).”

Doty says that Bennewitz also believed there was an alien base under Archuleta Mountain, near Dulce, New Mexico. Doty claims he worked with personnel from Ft. Carson to help perpetuate this idea. Doty explains, “We had a couple of black helicopters, and we had some things planted onto the ground around Archuleta peak, and just to convince him that what he was actually looking at, what he thought, actually was an alien base (5).”

Doty said that this disinformation campaign was an easier way to handle Bennewitz’s collection of sensitive Air Force activities than making him stop. He says, “It was easier for us to have done it that way than to get a warrant, a search warrant and a seizure warrant and seize all of his property and seize his equipment. What would that do? That would cause a lot of publicity, and the wrong type of publicity the base wanted (5).”

Bell asked Doty if he was aware that Bennewitz eventually ended up needing psychiatric care. Doty responded, “Yes, and I visited Paul a number of times.” He continued, “I was trying to convince Paul, and I went to his son to do this, that ‘hey, everything we told you before, Paul, isn’t true.’ And I explained to him why we were doing it, but he never believed me (5). “

Bell asked if he had any remorse for what happened to Bennewitz, to which Doty replied, “…it upset me what happened to Paul. I mean I went and tried to talk to Paul about it, against my commander’s orders. He told me, ‘Hey, he doesn’t have the clearance. You can’t go over there and tell him this stuff didn’t happen.’ But I did anyway, because I was concerned about Paul (5).”

Bell then asked Doty if there were other cases of UFO deception that Doty was involved with. He replied, “…pertaining to just UFOs, it was the four operations.” One of which he said was regarding researcher Linda Howe. He says, “…we invited her to Kirtland, we showed her some information pertaining to UFOs, we showed her a document and tried to bring her in and hook her on a hook, and she took it initially and then we carried on a contact with her over a period of time, meeting her at different locations and providing her with some information.” This is important because Doty has denied bringing Howe to Kirtland in the past, and has also denied showing her anything on UFOs. However, according to Howe, the document she was shown is very similar to a hoaxed document given to another UFO researcher, William Moore (5).

Doty elaborated on his association with Moore, saying, “Bill Moore was recruited by another person within Defense Intelligence Agency to provide disinformation.” In a letter to the editor in the July 15, 2000 issue of Saucer Smear, Doty wrote, “Moore was a coded source for OSI. That means he provided intelligence information that was documented. He was paid for his information. Moore was used to provide disinformation to Ufologists (12).” Although the details change, to my knowledge, Doty has never denied Moore’s involvement (5).

Finally, in regards to all of this, Doty claims in the radio program, “I followed orders. Everything we did was following orders (5).”

Although Doty claims the Bennewitz affair was disinformation, he also claims he was briefed on UFOs when he joined AFOSI. He says the briefing stated, among other things, “[Roswell] was real. We had an alien. It was in captivity up until 1951. He was kept at Kirtland and he was kept at Los Alamos. He died in the later part of 1951.” Doty also claims the alien liked strawberry ice cream and Tibetan music (5).

Hoaxed documents

This section will review hoaxed documents linked to Doty, most of which are connected to the events we have reviewed thus far. We will also review one document that surfaced just prior to Doty’s interactions with Bennewitz. The significance here is that if Doty is to be believed, these documents, which have had a significant impact on the UFO research community and society in general, are official fabrications of the USAF. If these documents were not created in a disinformation campaign, then Doty either alone or with others, participated in hoaxing official government documents.

Moore, the UFO researcher mentioned in the radio program, was co-author, with Charles Berlitz, of the book The Roswell Incident, which was published in 1980. It was the first book on the alleged UFO crash in Roswell. He says that in 1980 he was approached by a high level intelligence official, the same person Doty referenced earlier as working in the DIA, who said he and others knew the truth about UFOs and wanted the information out, so they would help him with his work. Moore gave this man the code name “Falcon” and says the he was told he would work primarily through a liaison that turned out to be Doty. Many have speculated that Doty was Falcon, but Moore denies this (13).

Moore says he began providing Falcon and Doty information on the UFO community and Paul Bennewitz. During a speech at a UFO conference in 1989, Moore said, “My role in the affair was largely that of a freelancer providing information on Paul’s current thinking and activities. I had nothing whatsoever to do with the counterintelligence and the disinformation (13).” However, he later claimed he was involved with dispensing at least one hoaxed document (14).

Moore says he worked with Falcon and Doty until 1984 (13). Rumors of his involvement with government agents eventually lead him to come clean in the aforementioned speech in 1989, at which point he retired from UFO research. In 1990, along with his research partner, Jamie Shandera, he released a document called The MJ-12 Documents: An Analytical Report, which analyzed the documents related to the Bennewitz Affair.

The first hoaxed document Moore examines is not part of the Bennewitz affair, but it does have links to Doty. It is a letter, along with an Air Force Incident/Complaint Report, from Ellsworth Air Force Base, regarding a UFO encounter. The letter claimed the incident had occurred on November 16, 1977, and was subsequently classified on December 2, 1977. The author claims he wanted to get the information out before the Air Force covered it up. The letter was sent to the National Enquirer (14). According to Bob Pratt of the National Enquirer, those named in the letter were questioned, and the letter was determined to be a hoax (15).

It is included in Moore’s report because he says Doty was stationed at Ellsworth at the time (14). Military records for Doty I obtained also show Doty was at Ellsworth from 1976 to 1979 (11). When Moore asked about the document, Doty told him he was aware of the “operation,” to create the document, but did not have any direct involvement (14).

The second document is a letter sent to a UFO organization called the Aerial Phenomena Research Organization (APRO) in July of 1980 about a UFO sighting that was witnessed by Craig Weitzel near Pecos, NM. It claims Weitzel was stationed at Dobbins AFB, but was visiting Kirtland. The letter claims a man in a black suit told Weitzel he saw something he should not have and demanded photographs of the object that Weitzel had taken. The man writing the letter claims he was a friend of Weitzel’s, and was himself stationed at Kirtland. He said Weitzel had spoken to an OSI agent named “Mr. Dody (sic)” about the matter (17).

Moore worked with APRO at the time the letter was received. He says the letter was loosely based off a real sighting, but was a hoax. He also says he didn’t know it then, but he found out later that Doty had written this letter. He says Doty told him the letter was meant to draw someone out of APRO who could provide information on Bennewitz, which, as we have seen, Moore eventually did end up participating in (14).

The third document is the first piece of disinformation allegedly given to Bennewitz. Moore says the document was given to him by Falcon and Doty to give to Bennewitz (14). The document was an alleged secret AFOSI teletype dated November, 1980. It was regarding analysis of Bennewitz’s photographs and alleges that this investigation is part of a secret project called Aquarius “with restricted access to ‘MJ Twelve’.” It claims NASA is monitoring the case and that AFOSI is gathering evidence and forwarding it to NASA (18).

Moore says he was given the document in March of 1981, but because he was hesitant to give knowingly false information to Bennewitz, he did not deliver it until late that summer (14). This timing is notable, because it was late summer, specifically July 30, when Senator Domenici went to Kirtland to ask about the Bennewitz investigation (4). Although Bennewitz and Senator Schmitt had already been told there was no AFOSI investigation (3)(4), the receipt of this document could explain why Bennewitz and/or Senator Domenici believed there was an investigation in the summer of 1981.

The fourth document is a list of notes allegedly used to brief President Carter on the UFO situation with bombastic claims of Air Force cover-ups regarding crashed UFOs, alien technology, interactions with aliens, etc. The cover again mentions Project Aquarius and “MJ12” (19). Moore says he was allowed to view and photograph this document in March of 1983 (14). In April of 1983, Linda Howe says she was invited to Kirtland Air Force Base by Doty and shown this document, or one very similar. As noted above, in the radio interview, Doty confirms this (5).

The fifth and final document is an MJ-12 Eisenhower briefing. This document was sent to Moore’s research partner, Jamie Shandera, on December 11, 1984, in a package from Albuquerque, New Mexico. The document was on 35 mm film (14). The document’s content shows similarities to the alleged Carter briefing, including the mention of MJ-12 (20)(14), first referenced in the teletype (18). It was also sent from Albuquerque, where Doty lived at the time and was still stationed at Kirtland AFB. However, Doty denies having created or sent the document (14).

Moore also denies having created the document (14). Allegedly acting on an anonymous tip, Shandera and Moore claim to have found a supporting document in the National Archives on July 18, 1985. This document is a July 14, 1954 memo from Robert Cutler, Special Assistant to the President, to General Twining regarding a “NSC/MJ-12 Special Studies Project.” It is a short memo and discusses the date and time of a meeting. It does not allude to the nature of the meeting (14). The National Archives has since released a paper outlining 10 points that “pose problems” for the authenticity of the document (22). Otherwise, there has yet to be any verifiable official reference to MJ-12.

The FBI undertook an investigation of the MJ-12 Eisenhower Briefing due to multiple requests. That investigation included a request to AFOSI headquarters inquiring about its authenticity. AFOSI claimed the document to be “bogus,” however, neither they nor the FBI have commented as to the document’s origins (9). To date, AFOSI has not commented on whether they have any involvement with the creation of the documents, as alleged by their own AFOSI agent, who, as demonstrated, was very closely related to the individuals who allegedly were anonymously given these documents, a document which also shares similarities to other documents that he asked to be given to Bennewitz, and had shown Moore and Howe.

According to Doty, “The FBI did an investigation on me because of the MJ-12 documents. It was 88 or 89… They thought I disclosed those documents (5).” If this is true, the results of their investigation have yet to be revealed.

Conclusion

Due to the extent at which the mythology created by Doty’s official or non-official disinformation campaign has worked its way into an alleged hidden history of Air Force and U.S. government secrecy, and due to the negative impact these events had on Mr. Bennewitz and his family, we deserve a response from the Air Force on their involvement, or non-involvement in this matter. Mr. Doty is now a sergeant for the New Mexico State Police, based out of Grants, and he continues to make wild accusations about the Air Force’s secret knowledge of UFOs and aliens. If he was not under orders to fabricate these documents, as he claims, then his employers and those he continues to attempt to perpetrate hoaxes upon, deserve to know this.

A 1989 article by UFO researcher Robert Hastings in the June 1989 MUFON Journal in which he alleges Doty is Falcon and Moore is working for the government. He followed up this paper with another in 2009 called Operation Bird Droppings.

Dr. Roger Leir is well known in Ufology as a pioneer in the study of alien implants, the mysterious little devices often left behind in the bodies of abductees after an encounter. Since sometime in the mid-1990s, Leir has conducted over a dozen surgeries to remove the tiny implants and then turned the devices over to various labs for further study.

Leir has recently been suffering from a debilitating case of shingles, which led to serious infections in his leg and foot, all of which were further complicated by diabetes. In order to help Leir pay his sizable medical bills, the Los Angeles chapter of the Mutual UFO Network (MUFON) devoted a meeting on July 21, 2012, to pay tribute to Leir and his many years of dedicated work in the field. Another meeting with the same lineup of speakers was hosted the next day by the Orange County chapter of MUFON in Costa Mesa, California.

The LA meeting began with some words from Steve Murillo, the state section director for MUFON Los Angeles. He said that the LA chapter receives new UFO reports daily, and some days can bring in two reports, with the Burbank area being especially active. The situation had come to a point where “we’re almost too busy,” Murillo said. The reports are often of lights that move quickly and assume strange shapes. Even so, he estimated that only about five percent of all sightings are reported.

“It’s nice to know that the community comes together when someone needs help,” Murillo said, meaning the UFO community’s events for Leir. “We have guests from as far away as Florida.”

Murillo then introduced hypnotherapist Yvonne Smith, who has worked with alien abductees for 21 years alongside such famous names as the late Budd Hopkins, the late Harvard psychiatrist Dr. John Mack, Roger Leir himself and others.

Yvonne Smith (R) with Jordan Maxwell. (Credit: Sean Casteel)

At the meeting, she primarily discussed her friendship with Leir. They met at a 1992 gathering of the Ventura-Santa Barbara MUFON chapter in Thousand Oaks. Smith had formed the Close Encounters Resource Organization (CERO) and took six abductees to the Thousands Oaks meeting, where they shared their experiences. Smith began to work with Leir and his colleague, Alice Leavy, who was at the time the assistant director of the Ventura-Santa Barbara group, on a documentary with well-known author and abductee Whitley Strieber called “Alien Intent.” The film has since aired a few times on television.

Smith said she is currently working on a multiple-persons abduction case. “Honestly, they do happen,” she said. She discussed a case involving three 9-year-old boys who were camping in a field near their homes and remember seeing a bright object above them but no more. The case happened several years ago, but Smith had recently made contact with all three of the experiencers and is working with Leir and Mexican UFO investigator and TV personality Jaime Maussan to further investigate what happened.

Smith showed a film clip of Ron Noel, one of the abductees, who now remembers something being inserted into his left arm. In the clip, Noel said he remembers that the three were “floating like balloons” after seeing the light. They were taken to a “place” where he could see that the “ground’s going farther and farther away.” He realizes he’s in a room but can’t see much; he has a feeling it’s a “really, really big room.”

“I feel comfortable,” Noel said, when asked if it was hot or cold. “I see a silhouette.” He felt something clammy touching his arms. “I can’t do what I want. I’m being held against my will and I don’t like it.”
One of the beings said, “Don’t be afraid, child. We are here to help you.” They put something in his arm, Noel continued. It didn’t hurt and there was no blood. They told him not to worry.

The object was removed and analyzed by a team of experts that included Steve Colbern, another speaker at the Leir fundraiser. One of those who examined the implant said it was so hard that even diamond tools could not cut it and a high-powered laser was required to do the job. Yvonne Smith thanked Leir for putting his “life and reputation” on the line by going public with his work.

Jose Escamilla (Credit: Sean Casteel)

The next speaker was filmmaker Jose Escamilla, who discussed his most recent film, “Celestial,” about purported artificial structures on the moon, photos of which have, he said, been tampered with by NASA. Escamilla also stated that full color photos taken by the space probe Clementine in 1994 give the observer an entirely different impression of the moon than the more familiar black and white photos we’re used to.

Photos taken of the Lobachevsky crater reveal a triangular object and what looks like construction work by some unknown entity, he said. He said another photo shows an object he likened to a crashed spaceship. Escamilla believes that Japan, India and China are also covering up similar discoveries on the moon.

The aforementioned Steven Colbern, a nanotechnologist, discussed the results of the various implant analyses. Colbern has been working with Leir since 1998, and it has been “an incredible experience” for him.

Colbern said the implants are nanotech objects that function as nano-electronic devices. The nano-tubes inside the implants are thousands of times stronger that any material we have today and are “proof positive that someone is coming here.”

Generally, the implants have a metallic core and can be found with simple stud finders as a start. If the stud finder indicates there is something there, then additional tests are needed, to include X-rays, although implants don’t always show up on X-rays. A Gauss meter is also useful in detecting implants. Sometimes the implants emit radio frequencies, and it is assumed that they all have this capability.

Steven Colbern (Credit: Sean Casteel)

Many of the implants contain common metals but with unusual isotopic ratios. Carbon nano-tube structures and atypical nano-crystals are common. The inner metallic core is surrounded by a membrane, and nerve cells grow into the membrane to connect the devices to the subject’s nervous system. The implants don’t prompt a response from a person’s immune system and are, therefore, impervious to the body’s natural tendency to reject a foreign object.

One of the objects Dr. Leir removed transmitted at a frequency used by our satellites, making Colbern wonder if the aliens are sharing information with the military. It is difficult to conceive of a way to make the implants with today’s technology, he said. Meanwhile, abductee Ron Noel seemed to go into a state of depression when his implant was removed but he has since pulled out of it. It’s not clear what effects might develop from removing implants.

Jordan Maxell, an expert in Biblical and occult symbolism, was the next scheduled speaker, but because the program was running long, he was limited to introducing Whitley Strieber, the keynote speaker for evening. Maxwell said that Dr. Leir had helped so many people in the past and that all of the money collected at the door would go to help Leir with his medical expenses.

Then Strieber took the stage. He said he and Dr. Leir go back to 1996, and that Leir was “looking remarkably well tonight.” In 1985, Strieber began, he had a CE III that is still affecting him and his thoughts. Strieber was referring to the December 26 experience of that year that led him to discover his own abduction history and write the bestselling book Communion. He went on to describe an experience that took place on May 2, 1995, around 11:30 p.m. or midnight. He heard the crunching of gravel in the driveway of his cabin, he said. Over the years, he has “learned that nobody who calls you after midnight is someone you want to talk to,” so he turned on the outdoor lights. The cabin had extensive security because of his earlier experiences, and [since the 1985 experience] “I slept like a nervous dog.”

Strieber saw two people at the foot of his bed and heard a male voice say, “Condition red.” His first thought, he said, was about the shotgun underneath his bed. He next saw that there was a woman there, who appeared to be about 5 feet, 4-5 inches tall and aged 25-35 with thin lips and a grave expression. There was also a man with a long beard who appeared to be redheaded. He felt pressure in his ear, Strieber said. The woman was speaking gently. Hypnosis very quickly becomes difficult to use in such cases because it’s difficult to know what the mind is just filling in from previous knowledge, so he didn’t use it to try to learn more about this event. When the waves of pressure stopped, he continued, he jumped up, flipped on the lights and heard something running through the woods. The security system was on and armed, and he checked the house and found no doors or windows open. The system covered all possible entrances. He did not enter the garage, which proved to be significant later. “Was it a nightmare?” he wondered. “What the hell happened?”

When Strieber’s wife, Anne, awoke that morning, she said she hadn’t heard anything the night before. Strieber went to the garage to get his car and make his daily trip to pick up the newspaper at a store down the road from their cabin. He found the garage door wide open. It wasn’t possible, Strieber said, for the alarm system to still be armed and for the garage door to be open because opening the door would have set off the alarm. He backed up the car a few feet and felt so much static electricity that he jumped out, fearing an explosion.

Strieber phoned the person who had sold him the alarm system and asked him to check out the problem. He found a powerful magnetic field around alarm switch, Strieber said, that was all out of proportion to the magnets used on the doors. He finally replaced the magnets and everything was fine. That afternoon, Strieber’s left ear began to hurt, but there was no visible entry point, scar or blood. Still, he could feel something in the ear. About the same time, Strieber continued, he began to hear about a California doctor [Dr. Leir] who “had gone completely insane” because he had gone public about removing alien implants. He almost lost his license because of his work.

Strieber said that there is “extraordinary knowledge waiting for us to pick up and use” if we would study the implants with an open mind. Many are encased in skin, which is why they don’t trigger immune system reactions. But we know that skin cannot grow in deep muscle tissue, so it’s a mystery how an implant survives. If we could understand how this process works, “medical science could advance significantly.”

There is an enormous cultural bias against the study of abductions and the implants that are so often part of the experience. Even Leslie Kean, the bestselling author of UFOs: Generals, Pilots and Government Officials Go on the Record, whose work is excellent, Strieber said, wouldn’t mention abductions. “This is something that is penetrating right into us,” Strieber said.

Whitley Strieber (Credit: Sean Casteel)

Returning to the subject of his 1995 implant, after a week or two his left ear began to turn bright red. He would hear a screeching sound and had a metallic taste in his mouth, which he now thinks could have been a fear reaction. At times, he thought about cutting his ear off altogether. Soon after, Strieber and Dr. Leir began to correspond. Leir’s primary concern is always the well-being of his patients and he refused to do some operations that a less careful doctor might have performed. Strieber decided at that point not to have the object removed. Later, after he and his wife had relocated to Texas, he decided to have a more local doctor try to remove the object, leaving Dr. Leir a bit miffed. The Texas doctor took X-rays, marked the site and made an incision. The doctor said the object looked like a white disc, and when he touched it, it moved. The doctor was only able to retrieve a small piece of the object and decided to terminate the procedure. The object at that point had moved to Strieber’s ear lobe. Two days later, the ear began to burn painfully and the implant moved back to its original location at the top of the ear.
The doctor told Strieber that the pathologist who examined the fragment said in a phone call that the piece of the implant was the strangest thing he had ever seen. Living cilia were attached to it. Strieber was left wondering if the object had moved for its own safety or for his. Strieber’s wife feels the implant should not be removed and is serving some useful purpose.

Still, Strieber had some good news for Dr. Leir. Dr. Bill Mallow, the chief of materials science at the Southwest Research Institute, contacted Strieber and asked about other implant reports. He called Leir and told him Mallow wanted to work with them, Strieber said. As a result, they had completely free and open access to millions of dollars worth of equipment.

Strieber and the others learned that the objects were of a metallic composition similar to some pieces that were sent to Art Bell when he was the regular host of “Coast To Coast AM” that were alleged to be part of the Roswell debris. One of the Bell pieces consisted of layers bismuth and magnesium with no apparent means holding them together. Another object Strieber and Leir’s team had analyzed was made from glass created in a rare industrial process and not likely to be picked up by anyone who wasn’t working in the factory where it was made. Another implant transmitted FM radio signals, while still another remained impervious to X-rays for a full 36 hours. The X-rays simply passed through it as though it wasn’t there.

There are numerous physical objects that can’t be explained, Strieber said. “This is knowledge lying on the ground, ready to be picked up and used. I find it outrageous that it’s not being seriously investigated.” Strieber went on to list some of the disappointments suffered along the way, such as offers of money and support that never came through. The Southwest Research Institute began to send back reports on blank paper, not risking using paper with its own letterheads. When Dr. Bill Mallow left his job at the Institute, the new director told the team that the CIA “took a dim view” of UFO research. There has been some excellent research by Steve Colbern, Strieber said, “but he won’t be published in peer-reviewed journals.”

In any case, Strieber said, Dr. Leir “is a true pioneer, a genuine pioneer of the first order.” When all this comes into focus, Dr. Leir should be someone students will read about in their history books.

In a Q and A session after his lecture, Strieber was asked if he feels the alien implants have had any effects on his health. “I’m not sure,” Strieber answered, “but for several years I’ve had nothing but some colds. I have seen no ill effects. My wife thinks I can do things with my ‘third eye’ because of the implant. My thought is that maybe when I’m 70 I’ll have it taken out.”

Dr. Roger Leir (Credit: Sean Casteel)

After a few more questions, Dr. Roger Leir himself came to the podium. “What I just heard this evening,” Leir said, “almost leaves me speechless and in a very emotional state. Thanks to the team that has helped our research and to those of you attending tonight. “The road for me has not been an easy one over the last several months,” Leir continued. He came down with shingles, the severity of which has increased considerably in the last several years. Now one in every six Americans is expected to come down with it. The chicken pox virus is being blamed for shingles, but they’re not really related, Leir said. It can attack all parts of the body, including the eyes. It’s a terrible disease, and he has become more and more debilitated. His spread to his foot with a serious infection.

Leir next spoke of a recent invitation he received from one of his patients to visit Yuma, Colorado, where he learned of cattle mutilations that dated back to the early 1900s, which negates the theory that the government is doing the mutilations to look for traces of radioactivity in livestock.

So for Dr. Roger Leir, his UFO research continues to be open to new discoveries and new ways of interpreting the data gleaned from his many implant removal surgeries. And the meetings hosted by the Los Angeles and Orange County chapters of MUFON demonstrate that the UFO community does indeed look out for its own and perhaps add a new shade of meaning to the saying, “We are not alone.”

To make a contribution for Dr. Roger Leir’s medical expenses, visit his website at www.alienscalpel.com. Or mail a check or money order directly to Leir at 625 Avenida De Los Arboles, Thousand Oaks, CA, 91360.

]]>http://www.openminds.tv/friends-and-well-wishers-gather-to-honor-pioneer-in-alien-implant-research-824/16562/feed2Deconstruction of Billy Meier’s Metal Sampleshttp://www.openminds.tv/deconstruction-billy-meiers-metal-samples/28955
http://www.openminds.tv/deconstruction-billy-meiers-metal-samples/28955#commentsFri, 13 Jan 2012 23:09:42 +0000http://www.openminds.tv/?p=28955The case of Eduard “Billy” Meier is one of the most famous among the UFO enthusiasts. For over 30 years, Meier has claimed to have had direct and continuous contact with extra-terrestrial beings. The case gained substantial credibility among supporters after the work done by Marcel Vogel, an IBM scientist at the time, who analyzed metal samples of alleged extra-terrestrial origin supplied by Meier. While most of the investigations in the Billy Meier case have concentrated on photographic material, not so much has been done on reviewing the scientific part of the famed metal samples.

This article concentrates on the scientific data collected by Vogel from the Meier samples. The results are presented best in the video Beamship: The Metal Analysis, which is part of a 1985 documentary with Jun-Ichi Yaoi from Japan’s Nippon Television. This video is so far the only source to my knowledge that properly displays the data obtained directly from the instruments used by Vogel. Other references, such as “UFO contact from the Pleiades: A preliminary investigation report” by Wendelle C. Stevens, do not show plots of the spectra or scanning electron micrographs and are limited to verbal descriptions of the results and conclusions reached by Vogel [1,2].

The main claims on Meier’s metal samples are the following:

1. Samples contain almost all of the elements of the periodic table.

2. Samples contain the hard to obtain element Thulium with its secondary bands missing in the EDS spectrum.

3. Inclusions in the metal sample exhibit birefringence, which is found in non-metallic or dielectric crystals.

4. Sample examined at a magnification of 500 diameters show signs of micro-manipulation or micro machining.

The claims above have direct data associated to them. Notice that many of the claims that Vogel made are secondary and derive from conclusions he reached from the propositions listed above. The intention of this article is to show that Vogel’s main claims can be scientifically verified based on his own data and that his results can be reproduced out of ordinary materials. The logical argument is that very similar results can be obtained from samples that do not possess the properties that Vogel claims. It is also the intention of this article to propose that, in light of the analysis herein presented, it is no longer necessary to analyze more samples that Meier may supply in the future.

The data from which Vogel claims to have found many elements is a spectrum obtained using Energy-Dispersive X-Ray Spectroscopy (EDS). This spectrum is shown in Fig.1.

Figure 1: Screen-shot of the EDS Spectrum collected by Vogel where he claims that all the elements of the periodic table are present. Spectrum collected at 20KeV acceleration voltage.

As a counter-example, Fig. 2 shows an EDS spectrum taken at 20KeV of ultra-pure nickel.

Given the similarities of the two spectra above, it can be deduced that the evidence for all the elements present in the sample can be reproduced by a sample consisting of virtually a single element which, in this case, was a pellet of ultra-pure nickel.

The scientific explanation is that the bell-shaped spectrum shown in both spectra is the so-called Bremsstrahlung continuum x-ray radiation, which is produced when electrons decelerate as they pass close to the atomic nuclei of the material. This phenomenon is very well known in EDS analysis and has no bearing on the element composition of the sample [3].

Fig. 3 shows a screen-shot of Vogel’s EDS spectrum where he identifies Thulium and other elements. Here, it is pointed out that the secondary bands of Thulium are not present, which is further used to speculate that the material was put together by unknown methods (e.g. cold fusion).

Figure 3: Screen-shot of the EDS Spectrum collected by Vogel where the claim is made that the element Thulium is present in the sample. Spectrum collected at 20KeV acceleration voltage.

The spectrum shown in Fig. 4 below was produced with a sample made by manually placing a small flake of Silver on top of Aluminum.

Figure 4: EDS Spectrum at 20KV of a sample consisting of Aluminum and a flake of Silver manually placed on top. The band at 0 KeV is background noise. Spectrum captured by I. Alvarado.

The striking similarity between the two spectra in Figs. 3 and 4 is evident and, thus, what Vogel observed was not the hard-to-obtain Thulium, but rather the very-common element Aluminum with some traces of Silver [4]. The Aluminum and Silver of the sample in Fig. 4 are obviously not bonded or alloyed and yet the sample still produces an EDS spectrum identical to Vogel’s. It then follows that EDS alone cannot determine neither chemical bonding nor alloying between the elements detected. Thus, the claim that the elements found in Meier’s sample are bonded or alloyed cannot be supported by EDS analysis alone. The proposition of the missing bands is then nullified as Aluminum does not possess them.

The scientific explanation of this is that Aluminum has one strong EDS band at 1.486 KeV, which is very close to the lowest energy band produced by Thulium at 1.462 KeV. It is common for a computer analyzing EDS spectra to mistake between elements whose energy bands lie close to each other. This explains why the computer also identified Bromine and Argon in Vogel’s spectrum as they too possess energy bands close to Aluminum and Silver. The presence or absence of secondary bands then becomes important to distinguish between elements. Thus, the spectrum obtained by Vogel is best explained as that produced by a piece of Aluminum with traces of Silver that are not alloyed or chemically bonded.

Vogel claims to have detected dielectric birefringence in inclusions around the edges of the sample by means of optical microscopy with cross-polarized illumination. The sequence of his observation is shown in Fig. 5. Here, Vogel goes on to speculate that the sample exhibits a duality between being a metal and a non-metallic crystal.

Figure 5: Two optical micrographs of the same region of the sample taken by Vogel. Left shows normal illumination and Right cross-polarized illumination. The bright portions on the right are claimed to be produced by crystal birefringence.

Now, it is true that a birefringent crystal will appear bright under cross-polarized illumination, when the crystal is aligned properly in the optical setup [5]. However, such observation can also be produced by samples that have rugged topography. Fig. 6 below shows an optical micrograph of a poorly deposited metal film on silicon as it is imaged under normal illumination conditions and under cross-polarized illumination.

Figure 6: Optical micrograph of a metal film poorly deposited onto the surface of a silicon wafer. Left shows normal illumination and Right cross-polarized illumination. The bright streaks on the right are produced by the topography of the surface. Micrographs captured by I. Alvarado with a 50x optical objective.

Just like in Vogel’s micrograph sequence, bright regions are also clearly observed in Fig. 6 under cross polarized light. The difference is now that they are produced merely by the topography of the metal itself and not by non-metallic crystal birefringence. This shows that the cross-polarization method is insufficient to establish whether dielectric birefringence exists in any given sample. Since the sample analyzed by Vogel has a very clear rough surface, the bright regions he observes under cross-polarized light are best explained by the surface topography and not by the presence of non-metallic crystal inclusions in the sample. Since there is no reason to believe that there are insulating portions embedded in Vogel’s metal sample, then severe charge accumulation during SEM imaging is not expected.

Vogel claims to have found evidence of mechanical manipulation at the micro-scale level, presumably done with lasers. This is based on the SEM picture shown in Fig. 7, where the magnification is specified at 500 diameters.

Figure 7: SEM micrograph taken by Vogel showing indentations at the micro scale. The image was taken at 500 diameters magnification.

Fig. 8 shows a SEM micrograph of the surface of an aluminum plate taken at a magnification of 500 diameters as well. This plate was made by conventional metal machining and its surface shows a very clear periodic pattern with a 50 micron pitch that the cutting edge produced during the process. The structure produced was not intentional and has no functionality. Other portions of the same surface did not show this structure.

Figure 8: SEM micrograph of the surface of an Aluminum plate machined by conventional means at 500 diameters magnification, as indicated in the lower caption bar. SEM captured by I. Alvarado.

Given that patterns like this can be obtained unintentionally by ordinary metal cutting tools, it is not necessary to speculate on possible exotic micro-machining processes to produce them. Indeed, a structure imaged at 500 diameters cannot be considered micro-machined even by 1985 technology, let alone by today’s state-of-art nanofabrication techniques, which routinely produce structures that are imaged at magnifications of 100,000 diameters [6].

To summarize, all the results obtained by Marcel Vogel have been properly reproduced from common samples using equivalent equipment and techniques. The spectrum showing all the elements of the periodic table was produced by a sample that virtually contains only one element, the spectrum showing Thulium and Silver was obtained out of a sample of non-alloyed Aluminum and Silver, the cross-polarization optical micrographs that are used to show non-metallic birefringence in the sample were reproduced by a purely metallic sample. A similar micro-machined structure was found in an ordinary machined metal. In all the cases, the instruments and techniques used were equivalent to those used by Vogel.

Many of the speculations adduced by Vogel become invalid in light of the counter-examples presented in this article. For instance, the missing bands of Thulium led Vogel to speculate on cold fusion, which becomes unsustainable after showing that the spectrum obtained is that of Aluminum. Speculation of duality metal-dielectric in the sample also is not required as no valid evidence of birefringence was presented. And so on with the rest of the claims.

Furthermore, some of the claims did not have data to support them and even other claims are pure anecdotes. For example, Vogel claimed that Rhenium was found in the sample with missing EDS bands also; the spectrum was not shown in either references [1] or [2] and it could have been Zinc, as this element has some EDS bands close to that of Rhenium. I am certainly willing to analyze more EDS spectra or SEM micrographs that Vogel or the lab in Switzerland might have produced on these samples, if they are brought to my attention. What should not be done is to take Vogel’s or any other scientist’s word alone to validate any conclusions.

* This is a guest post by Ivan Alvarado. Ivan is not affiliated with Open Minds, and the ideas, statements, and opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of Open Minds.

]]>http://www.openminds.tv/deconstruction-billy-meiers-metal-samples/28955/feed3Beamships Bustedhttp://www.openminds.tv/beamships-busted/12363
http://www.openminds.tv/beamships-busted/12363#commentsMon, 03 Oct 2011 22:06:31 +0000http://www.openminds.tv/?p=12363Of all the alleged UFO contact cases, one in particular stands out from all the rest. The case of Eduard “Billy” Meier has polarized Ufology for at least thirty-five years. Legions of so called “followers” support the case without question, while the scientific community in general believes the entire account to be an elaborate hoax. Starting on January 28, 1975 Billy Meier (resident of Schmidruti Switzerland) claims to have photographed authentic extraterrestrial spacecraft. He further claims that the occupants of these vehicles travelled to earth from the M45 star-cluster known as the Pleiades in the constellation Taurus. However, are the photos taken by Billy Meier authentic, and can they be duplicated using modern computer techniques? Furthermore, what specific points can be learned by comparing the Billy Meier photos against other purported UFO photos which are part of the vast collection compiled by the late Col. Wendelle Stevens?

After closely examining literally thousands of UFO photos originating from the Wendelle Stevens collection, fourteen significant criteria points became abundantly clear which can be used to gauge the authenticity of a particular image. Any purported UFO photo which contains three or more of the points listed below should immediately raise a “red flag”, and indicate the strong possibility that the photo is a hoax:

Multiple grouped UFO’s photographed in the same shot.

UFO never photographed on the ground

Object too large or disproportionate (use of forced or “false perspective” technique)

Object perfectly centered in frame

Object positioned perfectly about the vertical axis

Photograph too clear

Object surrounded by trees or various structures to obscure suspension rig

The photo above fails the authenticity test on three accounts. The object is perfectly composed in the frame, and also appears to be perfectly focused. In addition, the UFO is positioned exactly about the 90 degree vertical axis without the slightest hint of a slant. Per comments made by Billy Meier, the “Beamship” landed on the ground, and its occupant known as “Samjase” personally met with Meier multiple times. However photographs of this craft on the ground have never surfaced. Could this be due to the fact that the logistics of building a twenty-two foot diameter mock-up were too cost prohibitive?

Computer forensic composite image by Michael Schratt.

Photograph of Type IV Beamship by Billy Meier March 29, 1976.

In the above photograph, the UFO is perfectly composed in the frame, and centered about the vertical axis. Note that the craft appears very large in this photo (evidence of the forced or false perspective technique in use).

Note “eye-screw” used to suspend model.

Additional shots of the Beamship show clear evidence of fakery. Note the use of an “eye-screw” which was clearly utilized to hang the model from a suspension rig. In the process of building UFO models used to hoax photos, ordinary household items such as cups, bowls and paper plates can eventually weigh up to one pound making a robust attachment point a necessity.

The above two photos really are a laughable joke, and should never be considered authentic for multiple reasons. The craft is grossly out of proportion, and perfectly focused. Also note that it is perfectly oriented about the vertical axis. Note the close proximity of a tree in the background which may have been used to support the model. Looking closely at the image, it’s clear that ordinary materials were used to construct the craft. For the base, a standard plastic bin lid was used. For the “lower deck”, readily available plastic spheres were utilized. Ordinary brass shelf supports (see red ellipse) were used on the “mid deck” to give the craft a more “technical look”. Also note the gap between the spheres on the mid deck (shown by red arrow) indicating that there were spacing errors encountered during the assembly process. Also note in the above photo that you can’t actually see the craft sitting on the ground. Could this be because showing the entire bottom of the craft would give away its actual size?

Note in the above photo that there are three different shaped UFO’s in the same shot. This is an EXTREAMLY rare occurrence. In fact, Billy Meier seems to be the only person alive on earth to have captured such an image. Note that two of the vehicles appear aligned about the vertical axis. Also note that the three craft are grouped together relatively closely. Might this be due to the fact showing one vehicle separated from the other two would bring it out of the field of view exposing multiple suspension rigs?

Computer generated image of “Reconnaissance Ship” by Michael Schratt.

Photo of Beamship Type III taken by Billy Meier on March 8, 1976.

Note that the above photo was taken on March 8, 1976 which turns out to be the same date as Billy Meier’s multiple craft encounter (described above). This indicates that Meier had two separate encounters with different craft on the same day (highly unlikely). Also note that the craft is perfectly focused, and centered within the frame. The vehicle appears directly oriented about the vertical axis (exactly what would be expected due to the natural effect of gravity pulling on a suspension line). Note the relatively large size of the craft indicating additional use of the forced perspective technique.

The above photo shows signs of the forced perspective technique in use. Additionally, the craft is perfectly in focus, and aligned about the vertical axis.

Computer generated illustration of Beamship Type I by Michael Schratt.

After examining all of the UFO photos taken by Billy Meier which are part of the Wendelle Stevens collection, it is the assessment of this author that some of them are 100% fabricated, and therefore must be deemed hoaxes. The fact that none of the craft photographed exhibit any type of field propulsion distortion adds to this conclusion. Keeping in mind the physical properties of scale, proportion, line-of-sight, field of view, and focus, it appears that some the purported Billy Meier photos appear to be small scale models (approximately 14” in diameter) which have been suspended in front of the camera. Later, additional photo trickery was applied to remove any evidence of strings or wires. If the alleged encounters with these UFO’s did actually take place, why is it then, that none of the residents of the homes in the immediate vicinity photographed them? So called “metal samples” recovered from the Beamships by Billy Meier were independently examined by the University of Arizona, and were determined to be ordinary Copper and Silver. The case of Billy Meier should serve as a warning to Ufologists, and the general public as well to the dangers of “jumping on the UFO bandwagon” before a rigorous independent third party investigation is completed. Indeed the words of the late Carl Sagan apply: “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence”.

Listen to the hosts of Open Minds Radio discuss Billy Meier here, and at this link you can hear Billy Meier’s official US representative, Michael Horn, explain why he thinks the case is legitimate (show airs 10/3/2011 at 7 pm pacific).

]]>http://www.openminds.tv/beamships-busted/12363/feed0Opinion: UFOs & 9/11 Don’t Mixhttp://www.openminds.tv/opinion-ufos-911-dont-mix/11957
http://www.openminds.tv/opinion-ufos-911-dont-mix/11957#commentsThu, 08 Sep 2011 23:35:13 +0000http://www.openminds.tv/?p=11957This article was provided by the authors and first appeared at www.AfterDisclosure.com. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of OpenMinds.tv. It is presented here in order to spark discussion on the issue put forward by the authors, two prominent UFO researchers.

(image credit: www.AfterDisclosure.com)

The tenth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks is generating an avalanche of analysis and debate. While the world’s leaders and media pundits have their say, the UFO community must also take stock of the way many of its leading voices are talking about what happened on September 11, 2001.

We are deeply concerned.

At a time when there is reason to believe that the world is more ready than ever before to hear the evidence and arguments about the UFO phenomenon, the 9/11 issue threatens to undermine legitimate progress.

The examples of linkages being made by the UFO community with the 9/11 “truth” movement are no longer isolated. It is now a pattern of thinking that shows signs of being the dominant mind-set inside ufology. While we both have colleagues who hold these beliefs passionately, we think it is ill-advised and unhelpful to merge these two issues in an on-going public way.

It is a classic case of a flawed tactic being employed to pursue a worthy strategy.

(image credit: www.AfterDisclosure.com)

The purpose of a growing social movement is to win over the undecided, until they reach a critical mass of belief and change can happen. This worked for both the civil rights and anti-war movements of the 1960s and gay rights most recently.

This means that ufology must appeal to people who have not previously given the subject much thought and must be sufficiently persuasive to make them consider the issue with an open mind. It will not help to saddle the acceptance of an already challenging paradigm shift with the even less mainstream and massively more controversial belief in 9/11 conspiracy. If you are trying to promote serious media and public interest in one subject that is perceived by some as being a fringe issue (regardless of what the fact trail leads to), the very worst thing you can do is tie this to other issues that are also perceived as fringe. This is not an attempt to debate the 9/11 issue here. It is a statement about perception and politics only.

In August, we both attended the Leeds Exopolitics Conference, as speakers. 9/11 was raised on numerous occasions, both in Q&A sessions and in a number of the actual presentations. Ideas being presented included one speaker’s strongly held and well-presented theory that the authorities would stage a false flag alien invasion at the 2012 Olympics, as a prelude to a New World Order takeover. While many speakers and audience members clearly believe that the world is run by a powerful group of secret-keepers, what effect is being achieved by extending this into a public discourse based that casts them as wanton mass murderers?

Imagine reaching out to a genuine agnostic on the subject of UFOs by showing them a link to an official report submitted by a commercial airline pilot, which was correlated by radar, and seeing their mind open to this new paradigm shift. Then imagine what would happen if you tried to persuade them that the towers of the World Trade Center had been brought down in a controlled demolition and that what people saw and filmed hitting the buildings weren’t aircraft at all, but were anti-gravity remote control weapons, surrounded by holograms of aircraft, with all the passengers from the real aircraft languishing in FEMA camps. That result seems obvious, but even a lesser argument that it was an “inside job” will probably still feel like a bridge too far to that genuine agnostic or skeptic we’re trying to convert to an open mind.

(image credit: www.AfterDisclosure.com)

The idea that 9/11 was undertaken by the United States government (or rogue elements therein), or was “allowed to happen”, while the authorities looked the other way, may be widespread in certain quarters, but it enjoys little or no mainstream support. The idea that the US government would murder nearly 3000 of its own citizens is regarded by most people as crazy at best, but more often as deeply offensive, not just to those serving or having served in the military, but particularly to the families of the victims. Again, we are not talking about what actually happened as it is likely there is more to the story that will emerge over the years. We are talking about how people feel about the issue today.

The argument we heard made passionately at Leeds by more than a few speakers was that proving the 9/11 conspiracy would be “easier” than proving the UFO conspiracy and that once that was accomplished, the extraterrestrial issue would be a natural next victory.

To this line of reasoning, we can only say, “dream on”.

Besides the alienation such talk brings to those citizens we need to embrace the cause of UFO knowledge, the 9/11 issue has an even more disturbing and darker side.

Discussion of 9/11 conspiracy theories may start with technical debates about the temperature at which aviation fuel burns and steel melts, but it can quickly evolve into something more sinister, including accusations that Mossad was involved and that 4000 Jews left the World Trade Center shortly before the attacks, having received advance warning. Most in the 9/11 “truth” movement rightly condemn such anti-Semitic spin, but not all do.

As an example, one audience member’s question at the Leeds conference was, as often is the case, more of a statement. Hers was that Zionists orchestrated the 9/11 attacks and, for good measure, she threw in her view that Hollywood and the media are “run by the Jews” so we shouldn’t look to them for help in revealing the truth. Rather than being booed out of the room, as should have been the case, many people nodded their agreement, while others simply listened in silence, as if it was just another idea worthy of consideration. We wonder why this should be a part of a conference dedicated to the politics of contact with an extraterrestrial intelligence.

How in the world will this kind of talk — from wildly speculative theories to actual anti-Semitism — help ufology? The UFO community needs to be very careful here, because even if such views aren’t widespread, the mere perception that they are would be extremely damaging.

We have to pick which battle to fight. This is the wrong battle if the UFO community wants to be taken seriously. It is not our fight.

We respect people’s right to believe what they like about 9/11. It is, perhaps, a healthy indication of a democratic society when people can publicly accuse their own government of mass-murder, with no adverse consequences. However, the UFO community has made great strides recently in terms of making the subject more broadly acceptable. Witness, for example, the scholarly work of historian Richard Dolan; the impact of investigative journalists such as Leslie Kean and filmmakers like James Fox; and the mainstream — and increasingly positive — media coverage generated by the declassification and release of the UK government’s UFO files.

Given that the primary strategic goal of ufology is to reveal facts about UFOs, the most successful tactic is for those researchers who are interested in 9/11 conspiracy theories to pursue their interest separately. The UFO community has little to gain with the larger public and much to lose by linking these two issues.

There is an incredible irony embedded here. If there is a secret cabal of decision makers who are actively working to maintain a global UFO cover-up, one of the best tactics they could employ to keep the truth from coming out would be to tie ufology up in knots with another conspiracy theory that has even less public currency — i.e. 9/11 as an “inside job”. Yet this is exactly what the UFO community seems intent on doing to itself. When we embrace 9/11 conspiracy, we are, de facto, discrediting ourselves in the eyes of the very people we need to convince.

The job of advocating public openness on the issue of UFOs is challenging enough as it is. Why do the job of those who would slow down full and honest discussion?

As we contemplate the tragedy of 9/11 on this tenth anniversary, surely the UFO community can accept that making this controversy our fight does not further the cause, but risks setting it back decades.

Let’s get back to basics. UFOs exist. The truth about what they are and who’s behind them has not yet been definitively revealed. That’s a big enough challenge for now.

I consider myself to be both a skeptic and a believer. And I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that. Nor do I think those terms contradict each other, at least when it comes to the UFO phenomenon.

I am what you might call a “moderate” when it comes to my thoughts in this area… I am not ignorant enough to think there is no intelligent life anywhere beyond Earth, nor am I naïve enough to take at face value all of the “substantiated” reports and stories about UFOs.

My degree in journalism provided me with a great foundation with respect to reporting the facts and searching for the truth. At the same time, I understand when it comes to UFOs and alien visitation, there is very little tangible “proof.”

In my short time as content editor of Open Minds magazine, and therewith ufology, I have likened this study to a court case built on circumstantial evidence. In many legal cases, if there are enough substantial pieces to the puzzle, the jury can convict without the murder weapon, or even the body. It all depends upon the facts of the case and how they are presented.

Cover to Whitley Strieber's book Communion.

And I think that is perhaps the most important element of ufology, in terms of enlightening people with the “facts.” It’s all in the presentation.

The sheer array of “conventional” UFO sightings (much less the more detailed stories about abduction and the like) that have been, and continue to be reported, is staggering.

Take the December issue of MUFON (which, yes, on occasion, we take a gander at) for example. For the six-month period from June to November, 2009, there were 2,896 cases reported and assigned to MUFON state directors. That equals almost 500 cases per month. And these are only cases being reported to MUFON! This number will increase when Open Minds begins to assemble reports in the future. But still, these numbers represent a TINY portion of all UFO sightings.

Of course, many of these sightings, to be sure, can be explained away scientifically or by some other rational means as being either a hoax or simply not a “true” UFO. In my mind, this is fine. Even if only 1 or 2 or 5 percent of UFO cases provide credible evidence of something that seems to be not of this Earth, then this is something to be taken very seriously.

An aleged picture of the UFO over JV Gonzalez in Argentina.

Like many skeptical believers, I tend to be entertained by many of the UFO cases that I see being reported – and this is due to the sheer nature of the “stories” themselves. After all, I think everyone can admit it’s much easier to believe the story of someone like a military pilot such as Milton Torres (who was ordered to shoot down a UFO), than it is someone who can explicitly describe their alien encounters on spaceships and far-off planets. Not that all of these experiences or encounters should be discounted. For me, I like to focus on cases such as the recent sighting of the UFO at the power station/dam in Argentina. This story must be given credence due to the overwhelming number of witnesses.

The unfortunate predicament, or conundrum, with UFOs and aliens, to me, is…

Yes, we have all of this “circumstantial evidence.” But what can we say about it, or “prove” in this case, to the point that there is no reasonable doubt? This, it seems, we must leave up to the ufologists.

Personally, I believe some ufologists have already made up their mind. Which is upsetting to me. This is not something biologists or neurologists would do. A great percentage of the UFO material I read – I would estimate well over half – is heavily slanted and written with a recognizable bias toward the believer’s point of view.

In my mind, if we are ever to discover the facts and meanings behind UFOs and the intelligence behind them, the greater U.S. population will need to “buy in” to the endeavor. And I believe this will happen only through objective reporting that brings credibility and acceptance to ufology, which will bring it more into the mainstream media, which would be a perfect harbinger for government disclosure.

As in most scientific endeavors, there are many perspectives on how to approach any given research. In this story, the observed phenomena we are look for answers to are Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs). Sometimes referred to as Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAPs).

UFOs, UAPs, ESVs, ABC easy as 123

The term UAP is often used because of the baggage that comes along with the term UFO. Most often the term UFO is associated with extraterrestrials. In fact when someone calls something a UFO it is assumed it is extraterrestrial. If we knew that an object was extraterrestrial, it would no longer be an unknown, it would be a known object that we don’t have an acronym for yet. I guess I could coin one here, something like Extraterrestrial Space Vehicle (ESV).

The term UFO is also associated with a lot of silly movies and is the term used when making a joke of this area of study. Often this is referred to as the “giggle factor”. That is when people laugh at or make fun of UFOs. You have probably watched a newscast where the reporters make a joke and/or play the X-files theme when they cover a UFO story.

The majority of times I have been interviewed on the radio, the show starts off with the X-files theme. One guy was at least a little creative and played the music from My Favorite Martian.

There is no E in UFO

While the term UFO does serve as a catch-all for the phenomena, UFO does not and should not equal ESV. UFOs are Unidentified Flying Objects, and most often misidentified flying objects. Many reported UFO sightings have prosaic explanations, such as balloons, or flares tied to balloons as we saw in a recent hoax in New Jersey. They are also often stars, satellites, meteorites, weather anomalies, and a number of other things that are known and not paranormal.

Of course there are objects that display characteristics that cannot be explained by conventional means. However, some of these could also be man-made. The last super-secret aircraft to come to light was the stealth, and we think those were developed in the 80’s. With the exponential increase in technology over the last few decades, who knows what kind of exotic technologies the military may be testing. There is no doubt that a portion of UFO reports can be accredited to these types of sightings.

McMInnville UFO, 1950 (Image: University of Colorado)

Still, many make the argument that UFOs were spotted many years ago with configurations and characteristics that exhibit advance technologies when we were nowhere near advanced enough to create them. For instance in a UFO study done by the University of Colorado in 1968, commonly referred to as the Condon Report, they studied photographs taken outside of McMinnville, Oregon in 1950. The object hovered for a moment and then flew off at an extraordinary speed. One of these photos is the picture I used for this story. You can read more about this sighting at this link.

The scientists concluded: “This is one of the few UFO reports in which all factors investigated, geometric, psychological, and physical appear to be consistent with the assertion that an extraordinary flying object, silvery, metallic, disk-shaped, tens of meters in diameter, and evidently artificial, flew within sight of two witnesses. It cannot be said that the evidence positively rules out a fabrication, although there are some physical factors such as the accuracy of certain photometric measures of the original negatives which argue against a fabrication.”

I must note that despite these and other findings, the University of Colorado concluded that there was no scientific value to the investigation of UFOs, and the US Air Force took this cue to shut down their investigations in 1969. Still, the point being, this case was an example of observed technologies that were beyond human capabilities of the time.

I should also mention that some believe this McMinnville object, and other objects that have been reported that are similar in structure, were made by the Nazis during World War II. To complicate things, some of the researchers that believe these are possibly Nazi aircraft also believe they may have been back-engineered ET craft.

Other theories are that these objects are possibly from the future, other dimensions, or from highly advanced cultures within the planet.

Could they be extraterrestrial?

Any of these are a possibility, maybe they are all true, but of course the leading theory is the extraterrestrial hypothesis. Among the groups that seek serious scientific research into this field, some believe that entertaining the extraterrestrial hypothesis damages the credibility of the pursuit for answers in this field. They also feel that scientists will not want to attach their reputations to research that includes this hypothesis.

I do agree that some will shy away from research having anything to do with extraterrestrials, especially given the attitudes many have towards this sort of idea. However, beyond classic sightings, there are other reasons that serious researchers and scientist entertain the extraterrestrial hypothesis.

Compelling witness testimony to the ETH

One compelling area of evidence is credible witness testimony. Military insiders, such as Major George Filer, astronauts Edgar Mitchell and Gordon Cooper, and many others, tell us that they have knowledge that the military also believes these devices to be created by extraterrestrials.

From the very beginning of contemporary UFO studies scientists have speculated on this theory. Dr. Herman Oberth, a famous German rocket scientist who came to work for the US after World War II, said in 1954: “It is my thesis that flying saucers are real and that they are space ships from another solar system. I think that they possibly are manned by intelligent observers who are members of a race that may have been investigating our earth for centuries. I think that they have been sent out to conduct systematic, long-range investigations, first of men, animals and vegetation, and more recently of atomic centers, armaments and centers of armament production. They obviously have not come as invaders, but I believe their present mission may be one of scientific investigation.”

Some claim to have met ETs

There is also testimony from those that may have spent time with extraterrestrials. In 1961, Betty and Barney Hill were driving through New Hampshire when they noticed a bright object in the night sky following them. They got out and took a look, but eventually raced off frightened because the object flew towards them. During the next few moments they had a harrowing experience being buzzed by a large circular craft. They felt very strange when they got home, and began having memories of meeting the occupants of the craft. Eventually they were both taken into hypnotic states to try and recover their memories. Even though they were hypnotized separately, they remembered similar experiences. You can go here to read more.

In their experiences the pilots of the craft told Betty Hill that they were from another solar system. They even showed her a star map. Years later, researchers believed they solved the mystery of what Betty’s star map revealed, and the star configuration seemed to fit that of Zeta Reticuli, a relatively nearby start system.

Now we have thousands of accounts of people who believe they have been abducted. Many of them claim that they are told by their abductors that they are from other planets. Contrary to popular belief, some of these cases do have physical evidence as well. Many come back with strange “scoop marks”. These are marks where skin is removed, but there is no bleeding or scabbing and they heal quickly. Some people have put these marks under a UV lamp (black light), and their marks fluoresce. This fluorescing can be in a configuration, such as a triangle. Scrubbing the area to try to remove any substance on the surface reveals that whatever is fluorescing is under the skin. This fluorescing usually doesn’t last long.

The ETH is a valid possibility to pursue

So there are many reasons why serious researchers take the extraterrestrial hypothesis serious, and it is certainly one to look at closely. Any good scientist should be open to the possibility that their hypothesis or theory could be proven wrong if contradictory evidence comes to light. However, just because some people may feel uncomfortable with the notion that we are being visited and experimented upon by beings from other solar systems, doesn’t mean we should not pursue this possible explanation for the UFO phenomena.

I agree that the term UFO has been abused and comes with a lot of baggage, but it really is the accepted term when it comes to this research. If you told a buddy that you are looking into UAPs, or even my new term ESVs, they would ask you what the heck you are talking about. After explaining yourself, they would probably wonder why you didn’t just say UFO. Personally, I think it is important that we tackle the public perception of UFO research, rather than use a new term.

Luckily, there are scientists interested in this research. At the MUFON Symposium this past August 6-9th in Denver, Colorado, there were 4 or 5 scientists presenting material. At least one famous theoretical physicist, Dr. Michio Kaku, write in his new book that he is ready and willing to entertain the possibility of extraterrestrial visitations.

Even the conservative radio telescope watchers, SETI, had a couple of scientists at their last conference talking about the extraterrestrial hypothesis, and the possibility that the ETs are already here.

It is an uphill battle to change the strong perceptions people have of UFOs, but I think it is a winnable battle and worth the fight. It’s quite a shift to get people to stop thinking about UFOs as silly, and to get them to see this as serious research. However, in my experience, I see that shift happening.